Engadget Posted June 10, 2010 Posted June 10, 2010 It's both extremely sexy and scary that women can be so psychotic when it comes to love. It's flattering they get that into it to do crazy things, but also worrisome.
riyaasr Posted June 10, 2010 Posted June 10, 2010 I have always wondered about this. I had a tendency to develop intense crushes on certain individuals that were emotionally unavailable to me. I would have obssesive thoughts about them and would even cry (after I got home) if they ignored me. I would feel depressed/elated depending on my interaction with them that day. However, most of my feelings were internal and I took next to no action to either confess my feelings or go out of my way to be close to them. Sometimes I would find excuses to initiate contact (e-mail or text) but would only keep the convo going if they respond (as in I would never even send 2 texts or e-mails in a row without a response from them). However, the sheer intensity of my feelings given no actual dating relationship could potentially make me a bunny boiler right? Some of the things that are of further evidence that I could be a bunny boiler: I have on occassion called and hang up (blocked my phone id) to see if this person is where they said they would be. At social functions, I would sometimes join in the group where the object of my affection is and try to insert myself in the conversation I would sneak occasional glances in the direction of object of affection at social functions and am always ultra aware of where they are and who they are talking to If they mention a book or a movie that they like, I would sometimes read the said book or see the movie so that I can converse with them about it But how does one really know that they are a bunny boiler vs just a pathetic romantic with dead end crush? whats a bunny boiler?
harmfulsweetz Posted June 10, 2010 Posted June 10, 2010 whats a bunny boiler? by definition, me. A bunny boiler is a woman/man who gets obsessive/stalkerish when it comes to the object of their affections. I believe the term was coined when Glen Close's character in Fatal Attraction boiled a bunny of her obsession. Course, I'd worry if anyone cropped up saying they had actually done the whole boiled the bunny thing, but it runs along the same idea. It's funny, because women experience crushes and things so much harder than men, I think, and obsess about it so much more. Oh, I'm currently in the psychotic stage of my crush, I was reading what he wrote on a piece of paper yesterday :lmao: I love his writing.
donnamaybe Posted June 10, 2010 Posted June 10, 2010 Ariadne would still never boil a bunny Um, I think the term merely arose from the movie. I'm sure many have been termed "bunny boiler" and no one thought THEY would ever REALLY boil an actual bunny either.
Engadget Posted June 10, 2010 Posted June 10, 2010 My ex used to reference that scene in Fatal Attraction a lot, and for good reason. Glad she's an ex
Author SadandConfusedWA Posted June 10, 2010 Author Posted June 10, 2010 Um, I think the term merely arose from the movie. I'm sure many have been termed "bunny boiler" and no one thought THEY would ever REALLY boil an actual bunny either. Donna, I think that with the stalking - it's when the "victim" clearly tells you "I am not interested and don't want to have any contact with you, please stay away from me" or similar and you still persist THEN you have a serious problem. After DG knew what Ariadne did and the exact details - he still engaged in friendly every day e-mail correspondence where he proceeded to whinge about his ex for months. Perhaps Ariadne was foolish and in love and was wasting her affections on that guy but she is no stalker.
Ariadne Posted June 10, 2010 Posted June 10, 2010 After DG knew what Ariadne did and the exact details - he still engaged in friendly every day e-mail correspondence where he proceeded to whinge about his ex for months. Perhaps Ariadne was foolish and in love and was wasting her affections on that guy but she is no stalker. Thanks SaC
donnamaybe Posted June 11, 2010 Posted June 11, 2010 Donna, I think that with the stalking - it's when the "victim" clearly tells you "I am not interested and don't want to have any contact with you, please stay away from me" or similar and you still persist THEN you have a serious problem. After DG knew what Ariadne did and the exact details - he still engaged in friendly every day e-mail correspondence where he proceeded to whinge about his ex for months. Perhaps Ariadne was foolish and in love and was wasting her affections on that guy but she is no stalker. But does he KNOW she stood a block away and watched him through binoculars? He might actually take out a NCO if he knew that. I'm sorry, but traveling a great distance to unknowingly watch someone through binoculars at their place of residence is, in my experience with criminal justice, stalking behavior. An excerpt from the laws in my state indicate that anyone who "stalks, follows, monitors, or pursues another, whether in person or through technological or other means" is guilty of stalking behavior.
Author SadandConfusedWA Posted June 11, 2010 Author Posted June 11, 2010 But does he KNOW she stood a block away and watched him through binoculars? He might actually take out a NCO if he knew that. I'm sorry, but traveling a great distance to unknowingly watch someone through binoculars at their place of residence is, in my experience with criminal justice, stalking behavior. An excerpt from the laws in my state indicate that anyone who "stalks, follows, monitors, or pursues another, whether in person or through technological or other means" is guilty of stalking behavior. Yes he does know. She e-mailed him about it. As for the stalking behaviour, if that were the true definition of stalking, then about 90% of population is guilty of it. My most normal friend in the world checks on her ex bf on FB all the time without his knowledge. I guess she is a stalker too
donnamaybe Posted June 11, 2010 Posted June 11, 2010 Yes he does know. She e-mailed him about it. As for the stalking behaviour, if that were the true definition of stalking, then about 90% of population is guilty of it. My most normal friend in the world checks on her ex bf on FB all the time without his knowledge. I guess she is a stalker too You equate viewing someone's FB page (who obviously has "friended" them or, at the very least, hasn't purposely blocked them) with driving many miles to someone else's house and watching their activity from a block away without their knowledge? Oh, wow. And, yes. That IS stalking behavior. I've been in criminal justice for over 25 years. It just is. Simply because someone doesn't press charges, or in many cases just never finds out, doesn't negate the fact that it is stalking behavior.
Author SadandConfusedWA Posted June 11, 2010 Author Posted June 11, 2010 You equate viewing someone's FB page (who obviously has "friended" them or, at the very least, hasn't purposely blocked them) with driving many miles to someone else's house and watching their activity from a block away without their knowledge? Oh, wow. And, yes. That IS stalking behavior. I've been in criminal justice for over 25 years. It just is. Simply because someone doesn't press charges, or in many cases just never finds out, doesn't negate the fact that it is stalking behavior. I wasn't equating the two I was just saying that by the definition of stalking you posted, obssesive Facebook checking can fall under "monitoring someone by technological means". If the "victim" welcomes and reciprocates contact after being fully aware of the "stalking behaviour" then they only have themselves to blame.
donnamaybe Posted June 11, 2010 Posted June 11, 2010 (edited) I wasn't equating the two I was just saying that by the definition of stalking you posted, obssesive Facebook checking can fall under "monitoring someone by technological means". Nope. Facebook CAN be configured to block unwanted people or, at the very least, limit info to those on your friends list. By voluntarily putting pics and personal info about yourself on a social networking site and NOT configuring it to block unwanted parties or limit what they can see, you are inviting whoever chooses to see what you have put out there. Note: What YOU have put out there on a social networking site. A person allowing everyone free access to a web page they have created cannot, in any way, be equated with a person merely trying to live their life in their private residence without the expectation that someone would be outside trying to peer into their private life with binoculars. Anyone who makes a FB page knows others with a computer can see anything on their wall or in their info UNLESS they take the steps to make it otherwise. Some poor sucker merely trying to live his life in his own home? Not so much. FB viewing also cannot be equated with someone who has access via work to criminal/juvenile/driving records using that work-related access to find out things about folks that the general public is not allowed to know. THAT is more in line with the part about monitoring people via technological means. Another way would be installing a hidden camera without their knowledge. Oh, wait. That's kind of like the binocular thing. Bottom line, the discussed behavior makes MOST people go . Edited June 11, 2010 by donnamaybe
Ariadne Posted June 11, 2010 Posted June 11, 2010 Yes he does know. She e-mailed him about it. (Not only that, I forwarded him the emails I sent you from there at that time telling you all about it).
Mr White Posted June 12, 2010 Posted June 12, 2010 I have always wondered about this. I had a tendency to develop intense crushes on certain individuals that were emotionally unavailable to me. I would have obssesive thoughts about them and would even cry (after I got home) if they ignored me. I would feel depressed/elated depending on my interaction with them that day. However, most of my feelings were internal and I took next to no action to either confess my feelings or go out of my way to be close to them. Sometimes I would find excuses to initiate contact (e-mail or text) but would only keep the convo going if they respond (as in I would never even send 2 texts or e-mails in a row without a response from them). However, the sheer intensity of my feelings given no actual dating relationship could potentially make me a bunny boiler right? Some of the things that are of further evidence that I could be a bunny boiler: I have on occassion called and hang up (blocked my phone id) to see if this person is where they said they would be. At social functions, I would sometimes join in the group where the object of my affection is and try to insert myself in the conversation I would sneak occasional glances in the direction of object of affection at social functions and am always ultra aware of where they are and who they are talking to If they mention a book or a movie that they like, I would sometimes read the said book or see the movie so that I can converse with them about it But how does one really know that they are a bunny boiler vs just a pathetic romantic with dead end crush? If you gotta ask... Dunno, based on your posts you ARE a bunny boiler, in a sort of endearing, hot, messed up, mildly desperate way . But even so that's not good. Just a bit hardness around the edges when approppriate won't kill you.
Recommended Posts